Artic Winds Just Blew Through Hell: CNN's Rafferty Calls Nancy Pelosi a "Horrible Woman"

Satan can surely see his breath today for here is something we never thought would happen in a million years EVER:  A CNN anchor taking Nancy Pelosi to task...and calling her a "horrible woman" on top of it!




Jack, we couldn't agree with you more!

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

EATING THEIR OWN: House Dems Harass Harry

As Senate Dems bent on their socialist 'progressive' principles on health care yesterday to accomodate Joe Lieberman, the fallout is causing more problems for Harry Reid.

Rolland Burris (D-IL) indicated that he would not be supporting a bill without the public option and Ben Nelson (D-NE) is still "not on the bill" due to its public funding for abortion.

This means the math is even worse for Harry Reid than it was yesterday.

Meanwhile, House Democrats are getting impatient with Harry Reid.

“I think the majority leader sometimes has to have the leadership to resolve these things,” says Pennsylvania Rep. Joe Sestak, a Democrat challenging Sen. Arlen Specter, in a direct attack on Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.). “I understand it’s politically challenging, but we have the votes — and we should be doing much better than we are. I think this place needs a change, quite frankly.”

Further demonstrating their frustration, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is trying to quell fears of a populist backlash that is leaving her vulnerable House members feeling...well...vulnerable in 2010.

According to The HIll, Pelosi is assuring her queasy fellow Dems that the House will not take up any controversial bills unless the Senate acts first.

After a year of bruising legislative victories that some political analysts believe have done more to jeopardize her majority than to entrench it, Pelosi is shifting gears for the 2010 election.

....

“The Speaker has told members in meetings that we’ve done our jobs,” a Democratic leadership aide said. “And that next year the Senate’s going to have to prove what it can accomplish before we go sticking our necks out any further.”

Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), the president of the freshman class, said that Pelosi came to last Wednesday’s freshman breakfast to deliver that message, and that it was met with wide spread approval.

“I think freshmen, particularly, are not enamored of the idea of being asked to walk the plank on a controversial item if the Senate is not going to take any action,” Connolly said.

This means that the liberal legislative agenda which includes things like amnesty for illegals, the job-destroying Employee Free FORCED Choice Act, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", as well as "Tax & Trade" may be doomed for the next year--until after the mid-terms (depending on the outcome then).

If this is indeed the case, the decimation of America may be forestalled for another year and perhaps Christmas has indeed come early.

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

Cross-posted.

----------------------------

"In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit." - Ayn Rand

Harry Reid Has a Problem: His State Opposes Obamacare

Harry Reid has a problem.  According to a poll commissioned by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, a majority of Nevadans are opposed to the Obama-Pelosi-Reid health care nationalization effort.

President Barack Obama has lost ground in the last month in getting Nevadans to embrace his health care reform package and, for the first time, opposition is above 50 percent and support is below 40 percent, a new poll commissioned by the Las Vegas Review-Journal reveals.

The telephone poll of 625 registered voters found that 53 percent of Nevadans oppose the president's attempt to provide a remedy for problems in the nation's health care system. Support for the plan is at 39 percent....

Fueling discontent with the bill, the poll shows, is the growing belief by Nevadans that Obama's reform package will raise taxes, result in rationing of health care, and cause major cuts to Medicare programs.

"When you look at the entire poll, it's clear the voters of Nevada do not want this bill to pass," said Brad Coker, managing partner of Washington, D.C.-based Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc., which conducted the poll Monday through Wednesday. "When you break it all down, it appears that Nevadans would just as soon throw this bill out and start over." [Emphasis added.]

Harry, listen to your constituents: Scrap the bill!

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

AN IRATE ATTORNEY PENS A LETTER TO A FECKLESS FASCIST

Somehow, we missed Attorney Dennis Guthrie's August letter to the Big Government Bureaucrat Nancy Pelosi. Download the PDF here.

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

President Leaves Nuclear Option Open & Nancy Dodges Jail Question...

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Democrats may use the 'budget reconciliation' process to avoid getting 60 Senate votes, if a compromise is not reached on the nationalization of health care.

The Hill reports that Gibbs stated that...

President Barack Obama is hopeful that the Senate will pass a healthcare bill with 60 votes, but...held out the possibility that budget reconciliation rules could still be used.

If that is indeed the case and the Seante goes through with the nationalization of the country's health care system, there is likely to be a huge backlash in 2010.

Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi dodges a question about the fairness of sending people to jail for refusing to by health insurance.



Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

Health Care: Who Voted to End Individual Rights?

Under the cover of darkness on Saturday night, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 220-215 to nationalize America's health care system.

"If this health care bill becomes law, America, life as you have known it, freedom as you have exercised it and privacy as you have enjoyed it will cease to be," says Judge Andrew Napolitano of the nearly 2,000 page freedom-ending monstrosity of a bill (download all 1,990 pages here or view a partial breakdown of the bill on WSJ here).

Despite the freedom-ending language contained in the bill, 219 Democrats and one Republican voted to end freedom as we know it.

Click here to view who voted for it (in blue) and who voted against it (in red).

The question is, fellow Spartans and Patriots, will you remember these anti-freedom, anti-individual rights, peddlers of pull when election time comes?

We certainly hope so, as the best place for these Congressional culprits is the unemployment line.

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

Nancy's Health Care Nationalization

Let there be no mistake, Nancy Pelosi and her fellow Democrats' health care bill is the nationalization of America's health care system.

From Betsy McCaughey, writing in the Wall Street Journal [emphasis added]:

• Sec. 202 (p. 91-92) of the bill requires you to enroll in a "qualified plan." If you get your insurance at work, your employer will have a "grace period" to switch you to a "qualified plan," meaning a plan designed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. If you buy your own insurance, there's no grace period. You'll have to enroll in a qualified plan as soon as any term in your contract changes, such as the co-pay, deductible or benefit.
• Sec. 224 (p. 118) provides that 18 months after the bill becomes law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will decide what a "qualified plan" covers and how much you'll be legally required to pay for it. That's like a banker telling you to sign the loan agreement now, then filling in the interest rate and repayment terms 18 months later.
• Sec. 303 (pp. 167-168) makes it clear that, although the "qualified plan" is not yet designed, it will be of the "one size fits all" variety. The bill claims to offer choice—basic, enhanced and premium levels—but the benefits are the same. Only the co-pays and deductibles differ. You will have to enroll in the same plan, whether the government is paying for it or you and your employer are footing the bill.
• Sec. 59b (pp. 297-299) says that when you file your taxes, you must include proof that you are in a qualified plan. If not, you will be fined thousands of dollars. Illegal immigrants are exempt from this requirement.
• Sec. 412 (p. 272) says that employers must provide a "qualified plan" for their employees and pay 72.5% of the cost, and a smaller share of family coverage, or incur an 8% payroll tax. Small businesses, with payrolls from $500,000 to $750,000, are fined less.

To understand how this latter provision will lead to socialized medicine within three to five years, go here.

Read more of the WSJ analysis here...

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

NANCY PELOSI AND HER FELLOW FLESH-EATING FASCISTS...

If the opposite of freedom is slavery, then Nancy Pelosi wants to own you and your body.

Her aims to become the Queen of the Slave Traders has her lining up the votes to bind the American population to her health care scheme.

Ms. Pelosi and her fellow flesh-eating fascists have decreed that Americans shall be imprisoned should they refuse their prescription for nationalized health care.

From GOP's Committee On Ways & Means:

Today, Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.

In response to the JCT letter, Camp said: “This is the ultimate example of the Democrats’ command-and-control style of governing – buy what we tell you or go to jail. It is outrageous and it should be stopped immediately.”

Key excerpts from the JCT letter appear below:

“H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax.” [page 1] -
- - - - - - - - -

“If the government determines that the taxpayer’s unpaid tax liability results from
willful behavior, the following penalties could apply…” [page 2]
- - - - - - - - -

“Criminal penalties

Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:

• Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.

• Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]

When confronted with this same issue during its consideration of a similar individual mandate tax, the Senate Finance Committee worked on a bipartisan basis to include language in its bill that shielded Americans from civil and criminal penalties. The Pelosi bill, however, contains no similar language protecting American citizens from civil and criminal tax penalties that could include a $250,000 fine and five years in jail.

“The Senate Finance Committee had the good sense to eliminate the extreme penalty of incarceration. Speaker Pelosi’s decision to leave in the jail time provision is a threat to every family who cannot afford the $15,000 premium her plan creates. Fortunately, Republicans have an alternative that will lower health insurance costs without raising taxes or cutting Medicare,” said Camp.

According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speaker’s bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.

[Emphasis added.]

In the name of health care nationalization, Pelosi and her ilk seem hell bent on nothing less than the enslavement of the American people.

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

NANCY PELOSI: LIAR OF THE HOUSE

Should anyone be surprised that Nancy Pelosi lied?

Pelosi Breaks Pledge to Put Final Health Care Bill Online for 72 Hours Before Vote

Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD that the speaker will not allow the final language of the health care to be posted online for 72 hours before bringing the bill to a vote on the House floor, despite her September 24 statement that she was "absolutely" committed to doing so.

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

Is Dems' Health Care Plan Unconstitutional?

Nancy Pelosi's refusal to answer a question on the Constitutionality of the federal government mandate health insurance raised an important question:

Is the Democrats plan to nationalize health care constitutional?

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

Politicians Want to Hide Health Care Bill...

It's kind of scary when politicians want to hide the stuff they're up to from the very people who pay their salaries and keep them in their posh DC digs. In fact, it sort of stinks.

Yet, that is what Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid & Co. are plotting to do as they try to nationalize the health care system by passing one of the most intrusive pieces of legislation written in U.S. history.

From the Washington Examiner:

As Congress lurches closer to a decision on an enormous overhaul of the American health care system, pressure is mounting on legislative leaders to make the final bill available online for citizens to read before a vote.

Lawmakers were given just hours to examine the $789 billion stimulus plan, sweeping climate-change legislation and a $700 billion bailout package before final votes.

While most Americans normally ignore parliamentary detail, with health care looming, voters are suddenly paying attention. The Senate is expected to vote on a health bill in the weeks to come, representing months of work and stretching to hundreds of pages. And as of now, there is no assurance that members of the public, or even the senators themselves, will be given the chance to read the legislation before a vote.

....

The [Sunlight Foundation] has begun an effort to get Congress to post bills online, for all to see, 72 hours before lawmakers vote on them.

"It would give the public a chance to really digest and understand what is in the bill," [Lisa] Rosenberg said, "and communicate whether that is a good or a bad thing while there is still time to fix it."

A similar effort is under way in Congress. Reps. Brian Baird, D-Wash., and Greg Walden, R-Ore., are circulating a petition among House lawmakers that would force a vote on the 72-hour rule.

Nearly every Republican has signed on, but the Democratic leadership is unwilling to cede control over when bills are brought to the floor for votes and are discouraging their rank and file from signing the petition.

Senate Democrats voted down a similar measure last week for the health care bill.

While it is argued that Republicans are guilty of the same obstruction of transparency (e.g., the Patriot Act), both sides should be more accountable for their actions and it is up to the citizens to make that happen by demanding transparency by all the politicians.

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

LA RAZA'S HEALTH CARE MISSION: ASTRO-TURFING FOR ILLEGALS

We've all heard the term "astro-turf" coined by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to apply to grassroots opposition to the nationalization of Americans' health care.

And, we've heard President Obama state that illegal aliens would not be covered under Obamacare (which we exposed as another "You Lie" moment a couple of weeks ago).

However, today, we read that Liberals are seeking health-care access for illegals:

"Fearful that they're losing ground on immigration and health care, a group of House Democrats is pushing back and arguing that any health care bill should extend to all legal immigrants and allow illegal immigrants some access."

"The Democrats, trying to stiffen their party's spines on the contentious issue, say it's unfair to bar illegal immigrants from paying their own way in a government-sponsored exchange. Legal immigrants, they say, regardless of how long they've been in the United States, should be able to get government-subsidized health care if they meet the other eligibility requirements."

This is different from the president's plan to exclude illegals (while they're illegal), then grant amnesty under "immigration reform" to make formerly-excluded illegal aliens into fully- included legal citizens.

And, joining in the chorus for illegals to have access to the nationalized health care coverage is one of the first astro-turfing organization out there, La Raza:

"The National Council of La Raza launched its own 'flood their voice mail' campaign last week to put pressure on Mr. Baucus to expand coverage in his proposal to include all legal immigrants and to drop verification language in the legislation that would prevent illegal immigrants from obtaining coverage."

Of course, with nationalization (and, ultimately, unionization) of the entire health care industry and the inclusion of 11 million or so illegal aliens under a Democrat-imposed bill, the Democrats are aiming to be the party in power for generations to come.

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

SOCIALIZED MEDICINE FOR DUMMIES: MATH MADE EASY EXPLAINS HOW OBAMACARE WILL LEAD TO A FULL GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER

You've got to admit, the President of the United States does deliver one hell of a good speech and Wednesday night's repackaging of the same package was no exception. He is a really, really smooth talker!

To us, the President's speech had its highs (like when Joe Wilson called the President a liar and Nancy Pelosi almost went into cardiac arrest...Now, as we say in Sparta, that was freakin' HILARIOUS!) and it had its lows (like when the President invoked the memory of Teddy Kennedy and Joe Biden wiped a tear or two from his plastic-surgeon stretched eyes). [Were we not Spartans, we would have been bawling our eyes out too!]

It's too bad, however, that the President could not find it within himself to be more truthful with the citizens of the land we call America. For, if he were being honest, then the citizenry could make a more informed decision on whether or not they want socialized medicine (with or without death panels).

You see, his plan will, in fact, lead to socialized medicine. Of that you can be sure. Unfortunately, so many of our fellow Americans don't grasp this simple fact.

So, to make this really, really simple, Dienekes' Place is giving a really, really simple example (one of many) that you can share with those deniers of facts.

Socialized Medicine For Dummies, Democrats and assorted Union Thugs:

Here is how the Democrats' health care plan will lead to socialized medicine within three to five years, if not sooner:

Note: There will be a test, so please pay attention.

The Obama-Pelosi plan states that employers who do not cover their employees' health coverage will pay an eight percent (8%) tax (or penalty or whatever else they want to call it) so their employees can be covered under "the public option."

So, lets take "Bob" as an example:

Bob has a wife and two kids (called "dependents").

Bob makes $20 an hour driving a forklift at XYZ Company. [$20 X 2,080 hours = $41,600 per year]

XYZ Company provides Bob and his family with health benefits.

These health benefits cost about $800 per month, of which Bob pays 25% (or $200) and XYZ company pays 75% or ($600) per month. $600 per month X 12 months = $7200 per year.

$7200 divided by $41,600 = 17%

[This means that XYZ Company's portion of Bob's health benefits is 17% of Bob's pay.] [See footnote 1 below.]

Now, since the government is going to offer a plan that will supply Bob's health benefits at eight percent of his pay (or "payroll costs"), XYZ Company needs to answer the following questions:

1. Does XYZ Company continue paying 17% of Bob's total labor costs toward health care? Or...


2. Does XYZ Company drop its family coverage and just let Bob have single coverage, which means dumping Bobs's family onto the "public plan" but still cost XYZ Company about $450 per month, or 13% of Bob's pay? OR...


3. Does XYZ Company stop offering health benefits entirely and dump all its employees onto the public option for a mere 8% of its payroll costs?

This is a really important question: Which number below costs the least?

1. 17%
2. 13%
3. 8%?

If you answered #3 on each of the above tests, you got it 100% right! Congratulations!!!

[Note: If you missed either one or both of the above questions, there is no helping you, and you deserve to have your health care (and oxygen) rationed!]

Now, there are over four million private-sector employers in the United States employing around 130 million or so people. The total population in America is around 300 million.

Approximately, 58% (or 174 million) of all Americans get their insurance through employer-based plans, while many others get their benefits through other government programs like Medicare, Medicaid, VA, or public sector jobs.

If a mere 50% (or 87 million) of those Americans getting their coverage through private sector employers get dumped onto the 'public option' in the first year, instead of 47 million uninsured Americans being coverage, the number will jump to 134 million Americans in the government's plan almost immediately.

By year two, expect that number to increase again, as more companies realize the cost savings by dumping private insurance and opting for the government plan.

By the way, the private insurance companies, with all the new mandates, will not be lowering their costs to meet or beat the government. They will not be able to.

This means that, for every company that dumps its workers onto the government's plan, the closer the private insurance industry gets to going out of business.

Pretty soon (again, we project within three to five years), there will be a full takeover of health care in the United States, resulting in full-blown socialized medicine.

And that is Socialized Medicine for Dummies.

Cost increases paid through higher taxes, as well as rationing will follow shortly thereafter.

It doesn't take a genius to figure that out, and it sure as hell shouldn't take a politician to point it out (that is, if politicians were honest).

Any questions?

Footnote: The above figures are conservative estimates for illustration purposes only. According one recent article: "Annual premiums climbed to $4,438 for single workers and $11,556 for workers with families, the report showed."

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

'YOU LIE!' DRAWS PELOSI DEATH GLARE...BUT DID HE LIE?

At some point during last night's speech on health care, a Republican Congressmen yelled out "You lie!" It was fascinating to watch House Speaker Pelosi and Biden's reaction to this outburst.



Erick at Red State has some interesting comments this morning:

Barack Obama has signed on in toto to the Democrats’ healthcare plan, including a public option. He said that the plan won’t fund abortions. But it will. In fact, the Democrats specifically cut out of the legislation clear language to prevent funding of abortions. Moreso, the Hyde Amendment, which Barack Obama hides behind, would not apply to this legislation because the Hyde Amendment only applies to Department of Health and Human Services appropriations and, get this, the Democrats have decided that healthcare expenditures will not be in the HHS budget. Therefore, abortions will be paid for.

More importantly, Barack Obama said the plan will not cover illegal aliens. This is a lie. Joe Wilson was right. The legislation clearly says it will not fund illegal aliens BUT the legislation also prevents anyone from checking on the citizenship status of any person seeking healthcare. He is trying to have it both ways.

The entire speech from Barack Obama was loaded with half-truths and flat out lies. For example, he said he would not force the government option on anyone. But, the legislation provides an incentive for private employers to shove their employees onto the government plan.

Likewise, the President says individuals will be able to keep their insurance even when the switch jobs. That is not true. According to the Democrats’ legislation, if an employee switches jobs, they must get on a government approved plan and then can never get off it.

The President also tried to claim that this $900 billion plan will not add to the deficit. He will pay for it without tax increases he said. He said, instead, he’ll save money by reforming present healthcare. Why not do that now?

Even so, the Congressional Budget Office says the total savings from stamping out waste, fraud, and abuse would barely be a dent in the overall costs of the legislation.

The President was short on details, high on rhetoric, and much too partisan on this issue. He wants to work across the aisle, but on his terms with a pre-existing failed Democrat plan.

The question is now: Will Obama's nationalization of health care be his Waterloo (not before it passes, but after)?

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

NANCY PELOSI HAS OBAMA BY THE HUEVOS & HIS POLL NUMBERS ARE IN THE TANK. CAN HE SAVE HIMSELF?

Nancy Pelosi is holding tightly to President Barack Obama's health care "package." The question is, will tonight's mucho grande speech help pull his chestnuts out of the roasting fire.

According to Politico:

Tired of watching helplessly as House bills are carved up to win support from conservative Democrats and moderate Republicans in the Senate, the speaker has a message for President Barack Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: Take the public option out of health care reform, and you may not have a bill at all.

In other words, Pelosi's pushing for nothing less than 'the public option' and she and her fellow liberals will destroy all reform efforts unless they get their way.

To make matters worse, Obama's poll numbers are in the tank.

Public disapproval of President Barack Obama's handling of health care has jumped to 52 percent, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll released hours before he makes his case for overhaul in a prime-time address to Congress.

As Obama prepares for his big speech tonight, the question we'll find out tomorrow is: After 29 events and 122 speeches on health care can he gain any credibility back? In a word: Nope.

Although he's come from behind before (just ask Hillary Clinton), the nation is quickly becoming wary of he and Pelosi's push to radicalize America. And, while Barack Obama gives one heck of a good speech, no one in America (except for the freaks who keep voting her in) trusts Nancy Pelosi.

Worse still, the Democrats are losing one of their most trusted constiuencies, the senior citizens. [Guess who gets rationed first when rationing begins?]

The perpetual and oh-so-useful campaign demon of George W. Bush is gone, demonizing insurance companies will only go so far and, at present, the economy is still in tatters. In sum, Obama's "hope" and "change" has been, for many already skeptical Americans, transformed to: "Oh. This is not what we were hoping for and you can keep that kind of change."

This is not to say, however, that Pelosi can't tighten her hold on Obama's 'package' and force her agenda.

However, if Obama allows that to happen, despite his natural desire to do so, he will be seen as weak and non-presidential. Therefore, he's either all in (damn the poll numbers) for the 'public option' or he needs to show his ability to get Pelosi's claws out of his mojo and do health care reform without it.

In either case, on health care, he's in a no-win situation and we don't see him pulling it out and being able to regain his credibility.

Call it what you will, nationalizing health care is socializing health care and you're either for it or your against it.

SOCIALIZED MEDICINE FREAKS' HELLISH RUSH TO PASS AN UNWRITTEN BILL

After having their constituents raise holy hell with them over these past several weeks, one would think that Democrats would slow down and rethink plunging American headfirst into nationalizing health care. Afterall, the President did say that it needed to be done right, didn't he? However, that apparently is not going to happen.

According to ABC News, the President is pushing for urgency to get a bill through Congress and Democrat leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid stated they can get a package passed--even if they don't know what that package is.

While White House spokesman Robert Gibbs today refrained from telling reporters whether President Obama in his speech Wednesday night will set a deadline for passing health care reform, sources tell ABC News that in his private meeting with Democratic congressional leaders this afternoon the key word was
urgency.

The president told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., that it is important for them to pass health care reform bills soon, the sources said. Both leaders told the president that despite the difficult rough and tumble of the legislative process in the last few weeks, they are optimistic that both the House and Senate can pass health care reform legislation.

What will be in the bill remains an open question, though after the meeting, Reid told reporters that “we're going to do our very best to have a public option or something like a public option before we finish this
work.” [Emphasis added.]

Follow Dienekes' Place on Twitter.

DE-CONSTRUCTING NANCY PELOSI & HER DEMONS: Why America Doesn't Need a "Public Option" to Lower Prices

The frustrating part of watching the health care debate is this: If lowering the cost of health care were politicians' real motivation, the answer is right in front of them: Since Government has caused the high-cost of health care, get the government out of health care.

Understanding Pelosi's Ploys

Like any good Trotskyite, Nancy Pelosi and her co-conspirators on the Left can only affect "change" by demonizing those who are opposed to their version of reform. Pelosi's op-ed (along with fellow politician Steny Hoyer) calling Americans "un-American" because they are vocally opposed nationalized health care and arrogant politicians is but one example.

Demonization is a tactic that has been used by propagandists the world over, from Josef Goebbels to Saul Alinksy. The Pelosi style of propaganda that has been used repeatedly over the last several years can be summed up with Alinsky's Power Tactics, especially No. 13, which states: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."

This tactic worked extremely well for Pelosi & Co. in 2005 and, ultimately, helped she and her fellow Democrats take over Congress in 2006.

Now, in the so-called "health care reform" debates, in addition to ordinary Americans, Pelosi has taken to demonizing insurance companies.

On July 30th, Pelosi used the terms 'villains' and 'immoral' to describe insurance companies.

"It's almost immoral what they are doing," Pelosi said to reporters, referring to insurance companies. "Of course they've been immoral all along in how they have treated the people that they insure," she said, adding, "They are the villains. They have been part of the problem in a major way. They are doing everything in their power to stop a public option from happening."

What is causing Pelosi's ire? Is it the high costs of health care? Or, rather, is it that insurance companies don't agree with being nationalized Hugo Chavez style?

The Truth Behind the Left's Lies.

While the pundits, the politicians, as well as the vast majority of Americans agree that health care costs are too high, who is really to blame? The insurance companies? Or is it the ones casting the stones (the politicians)?

To listen to Nancy Pelosi and the Left as they demonize insurance companies, Americans are led to believe that private insurance companies are monopolies. In fact, in a 2008 report, the Urban Institute stated:

Insurance markets have become dominated by a small number of large insurers.
For example, Robinson found that in all but 14 states, three or fewer insurers accounted for 65 percent of the commercial market in 2003.

Of course, claiming that private insurance companies are monopolistic is a problem that, if examined more closely, would solve much of the debate about whether or not America really needs nationalized health care with a "public option" as Pelosi & Co. proposes.

Coercive Monopolies Cannot Exist Without the Coercive Power of Government

According to Wikipedia, a coercive monopoly "is a business concern that prohibits competitors from entering the field, with the natural result being that the firm is able to make pricing and production decisions independent of competitive forces."

Yet, in a free market, a coercive monopoly cannot exist.

As Nathaniel Branden, PhD. wrote in 1962:

One of the worst fallacies in the field of economics—propagated by Karl Marx and accepted by almost everyone today, including many businessmen—is that the development of monopolies is an inescapable and intrinsic result of the operation of a free, unregulated economy. In fact, the exact opposite is true. It is a free market that makes monopolies impossible.
....

In the whole history of capitalism, no one has been able to establish a coercive monopoly by means of competition on a free market. There is only one way to forbid entry into a given field of production: by law. Every single coercive monopoly that exists or ever has existed—in the United States, in Europe or anywhere else in the world—was created and made possible only by an act of government: by special franchises, licenses, subsidies, by legislative actions which granted special privileges (not obtainable on a free market) to a man or a group of men, and forbade all others to enter that particular field.

A coercive monopoly is not the result of laissez-faire; it can result only from the abrogation of laissez-faire and from the introduction of the opposite principle—the principle of statism.

So, if insurance companies are acting as coercive monopolies, they are doing so with the blessing (or curse) of too much government intervention, not because of a lack of government intervention.

Therefore, in order to lower costs, there must be more competition, not less.

Indeed, if insurance companies are coercive monopolies as the Left suggests, then why doesn't the Justice Department prosecute them under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, which was allegedly enacted to prohibit monopolies?

The reason is simple. The reason insurance companies have "monopolies" is because they are state mandated. In other words, the government has created those monopolies that the government in Washington is now demonizing.

The Answer is Less Government, Not More Government.

On August 11th, the Wall Street Journal published an op-ed by Whole Foods CEO John Mackey for which he was loudly demonized by the Left, to include a Left-led boycott of Whole Foods [see Alinsky's Rule #13 above].

In his op-ed, Mackey offered a number of sound recommendations to help reduce health care costs which the Left has not responded to [except for their demonization of Mackey and the boycott]. Concerning the monopolistic nature of the insurance companies, Mackey wrote:

• Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair.

• Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. We should all have the legal right to purchase health insurance from any insurance company in any state and we should be able use that insurance wherever we live. Health insurance should be portable.

• Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying.

While each of the above are Mackey's recommendations, they also state very well how the government has over-regulated the free market.

• Individual health insurance is not tax deductible (government caused)
• Insurance companies cannot compete across state lines in many states (government caused)
• Insurance companies are mandated on what is covered, thereby reducing choice (government caused)

Of course, since Pelosi & Co. can't wield the government's hammer of anti-trust laws to end insurance companies monopolies (since they are government caused), she must demonize them in order to use the sickle of the government to cut them down through a "public option."

Were government leaders to be serious about true health care reform, they would admit the government is the problem, not the solution with health care costs.

This leads to the question: Is Nancy Pelosi really after lower cost health care, or just a total take over by the government?

Note: The above does not address the other needed reform in health care, which is tort reform. Of course, as Howard Dean acknowledged just a couple of weeks ago, the people who wrote the health care bill do not want to take on the trial lawyers.

Follow us on Twitter.

ON SEPTEMBER 8TH, YOUR CHILD WILL BE LISTENING TO BARACK OBAMA (WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT)

Start de-programming your children now, because on September 8th, the first day of school for millions of school children across the country, the President of the United States will be speaking to ALL public school children from kindergarten through high school.

While there are no announcements stating that this will be a political attempt to turn the nation's children into Obama disciples, the Drudge Report has posted a "Menu of Activities" from the U.S. Dept. of Education telling teachers how to raise awareness to the president's "message" (whatever that message may be).

In addition, given the speed in which Obama-Reid-Pelosi triumvirate has instilled the reaching hand of government into all the more orifices of American life, suspecting that the president will attempt to turn kids into converts for his message is not an unreasonable suspicion.